118 replies to this topic

[PayasYouRace]

Honda, Mercedes, Ferrari and Cosworth all have viable V-10's.

 

Do they? As in actual racing spec V10s? Where are they currently being used?

 

All the tooling and associated equipment from the last F1 V10 spec will be long gone now. No manufacturer of anything will keep that kind of thing gathering dust for a decade.

[Donka]

Do they? As in actual racing spec V10s? Where are they currently being used?

 

All the tooling and associated equipment from the last F1 V10 spec will be long gone now. No manufacturer of anything will keep that kind of thing gathering dust for a decade.

 

Retooling is cheap compared to the R&D associated with the current PU.  Key thing is they already have to blue's for a working and competitive V10.  

[travbrad]

I actually like the idea of capping the price that the manufacturers can charge for their engine, but not if it means those other teams get sub-par engines that are years old.  Just look at this year's Ferrari engine compared to last year.  You might as well have a Renault.

 

 

 

Tier Five

 

 

Fred (Fernando) and Barney (Button)?

[PayasYouRace]

Retooling is cheap compared to the R&D associated with the current PU.  Key thing is they already have to blue's for a working and competitive V10.  

 

I don't know how long manufacturers keep drawings after stopping production, but let's say they all kept a full set of them for their old V10s. Now which manufacturer is going to risk simply building their old engine to the same spec, and which will plough some money into further development to be the best engine for their re-introduction? Those engines weren't homologated, so there's no spec that can be mandated.

 

I don't see why it would be attractive to any of the old manufacturers apart from maybe Cosworth to start up an decade old engine line again.

[Wuzak]

Honda, Mercedes, Ferrari and Cosworth all have viable V-10's. Pick up the spec from before V-8's came into play, and you have fully developed engines ready to go.

Which of those would bother? That is the real question.

btw, you forgot Renault, Toyota, BMW and Ford.

 

I don't know where you are getting your figures from, but a single V6PU costs as much as an entire season of V-10's.

Given that a season's worth of V8s were price capped after being frozen spec for 2-3 years, and the V10s had no such freeze or price cap, I can't see how a full season of V10s cost less than a single V6 PU. 

[George Costanza]

The manufacturers want to use the platform to showcase the hybrid technology.  It's something that is relevant to road cars.  A V10 doesn't carry over much if any technology to market.

I think most racing fans remember the sound and aura of the 1995 Ferrari V12 F1 engine.... They will always remember that sound.

 

The Hybirds? No. We won't care for that in 20 years whereas we will probably still be talking about the 1995 Ferrari V12 sound.

[oetzi]

Why not different prices for different engines (V6, V8, V10)?

What price 12s?

[oetzi]

I think most racing fans remember the sound and aura of the 1995 Ferrari V12 F1 engine.... They will always remember that sound.

The Hybirds? No. We won't care for that in 20 years whereas we will probably still be talking about the 1995 Ferrari V12 sound.

Ha ha, just read this topic and replied to something from p1. And guess what, you're right

[oetzi]

I think most racing fans remember the sound and aura of the 1995 Ferrari V12 F1 engine.... They will always remember that sound.

The Hybirds? No. We won't care for that in 20 years whereas we will probably still be talking about the 1995 Ferrari V12 sound.

And that is the value of F1 to manufacturers

And you're right again, nobody will ever remember the last few Ferrari F1 cars, V8s included. They're boring.

It's nothing to do with being successful. You have to touch something in people to make it work for you.

Renault's first turbo wasn't even Renault's best engine, but it was their best remembered. A little 1.5 litre engine sticking it to 3 litre 8s and 12s caught people's imagination, even when it blew up.

Now everything's so prescriptive, a company can only really get it wrong, not get it right, and that's not a good look.

People will admire this Merc, and last year's, but only for its results. It won't be remembered as a wonderful thing, just as a generator of wonderful statistics.

And that's better for forum arguing than marketing.

Edited by oetzi, 18 September 2015 - 08:46.

[SenorSjon]

The manufacturers want to use the platform to showcase the hybrid technology.  It's something that is relevant to road cars.  A V10 doesn't carry over much if any technology to market.

 

Well, the supercar market still has V10, V12, etc engines. Even a V12 hybrid if you want to push it that way.

 

But we have:

Mercedes

Put all eggs in the V6T basket and will have a few seasons of dominance granted by FOM/FIA/SWG to get their investment back.

Ferrari

Will never pull out of F1

Renault

Weak and unreliable. Could buy Lotus or could leave.

Honda

Puny ERS, unreliable.

 

Renault and Honda could leave and we've seen multiple reports of VAG, BMW et al that it has no use to develop an engine for F1. No tarmac testing, no real upgrades (token system) allowed and a very strict ruleset about the piston, block angle, and all other dimensions. Not to forget a whole array of penalties once you are past your fourth engine. Someone could qualify at the back and still start 10th with all the penalties going around.

 

And who would supply the V10s? 

 

Mercedes - probably not. Renault? Definitely not. Honda? Forget it.

 

It'd be Ferrari and Cosworth. And one of those is likely to dominate the other (think $$$$).

 

Plus, the engines would likely be no cheaper than the current PUs, unless they were price capped.

 

Well, it is much easier to design a V10 to run 500 km's than to run all the current systems for 2.500 km's. It would interest more motor companies (Yamaha/Hart, Cosworth, Toyota, BMW, VAG) to be able to build an engine without a whole lot of crap bolted to it.

[Fatgadget]

Well, the supercar market still has V10, V12, etc engines. Even a V12 hybrid if you want to push it that way.

But we have:
Mercedes
Put all eggs in the V6T basket and will have a few seasons of dominance granted by FOM/FIA/SWG to get their investment back.
Ferrari
Will never pull out of F1
Renault
Weak and unreliable. Could buy Lotus or could leave.
Honda
Puny ERS, unreliable.

Renault and Honda could leave and we've seen multiple reports of VAG, BMW et al that it has no use to develop an engine for F1. No tarmac testing, no real upgrades (token system) allowed and a very strict ruleset about the piston, block angle, and all other dimensions. Not to forget a whole array of penalties once you are past your fourth engine. Someone could qualify at the back and still start 10th with all the penalties going around.


Well, it is much easier to design a V10 to run 500 km's than to run all the current systems for 2.500 km's. It would interest more motor companies (Yamaha/Hart, Cosworth, Toyota, BMW, VAG) to be able to build an engine without a whole lot of crap bolted to it.

And you know this how? Besides,should that have been the case,how come F1 has these current engines (with crap bolted on) after no doubt consulting interested parties before their introduction?

Edited by Fatgadget, 18 September 2015 - 12:00.

[Wuzak]

And you this how? Besides,should that have been the case,how come F1 has these current engines (with crap bolted on) after no doubt consulting interested parties before their introduction?

 

Which certainly included VAG.

[Wuzak]

Well, it is much easier to design a V10 to run 500 km's than to run all the current systems for 2.500 km's. It would interest more motor companies (Yamaha/Hart, Cosworth, Toyota, BMW, VAG) to be able to build an engine without a whole lot of crap bolted to it.

 

Of your list, only Cosworth would remotely be interested.

 

Yamaha - very doubtful.

Hart - do they exist any more?

Toyota - doubt there would be any interest there. Plus they have committed to WEC.

BMW - not interested in current F1. Also not interested in F1 with the older engines.

VAG - were consulted about the F1 engine. That's why the original concept was for an I4. 

 

Mercedes would no longer be interested.

Renault wouldn't be either.

Honda only came back for the new regulations. If we reverted to V8s or V10s they would be out the door so quick.

 

So that leaves Ferrari and, maybe, Cosworth. In the past Cosworth have done well, but only when backed by a major manufacturer (ie Ford). That won't be forthcoming for older style N/A engines. So it will be an unequal contest between Ferrari and many Cosworth customers.

[SenorSjon]

I've read Honda is only in it because they could acquire the PURE project(?). Renault is trying to skimp along, so it makes no difference. They don't want to supply other teams in the future. 

 

Most engine manufacturers don't like the closed spec of F1. In WEC they can try what they want.

[johnwilliamdavies]

http://www.autosport...t.php/id/120865

 

£9m for a current spec engine sounds good. 

[KTownDevil]

Tobias Grüner F1‏@tgruener

#F1 As reported already this morning, Ferrari threatened to veto the proposed cost cap on engines. AMuS (in German):

 

http://www.auto-moto...rt-9980660.html

[Petroltorque]

Yes $14 million for a current spec engine might seem attractive but when you factor in gearbox, fuels and lubricants the cost starts going up. Still favours the works manufacturer since only those teams will get bespoke fuels/ lubricants and complex engine maps. You still have got a two tier system. As ever the F1 regs are still being written with buck shot.

[Fastcake]

http://www.autosport...t.php/id/120865

£9m for a current spec engine sounds good.

For those who haven't read it, they've also agreed on a gearbox cost cap at £1.5m. A sensible proposal to cap the price of both at the same time.

[LukeFrost17]

Good to see that the teams are driving costs down for the current spec engines as it helps keep the smaller teams in the grid.

 

£15m-£20m for the engine is far too much so good to actually see some cost-cutting measures introduced.